Putin’s new world order

The president of Russia uses a Putin-speak in his speeches that we must parse word for word, in our own best interests. Only after translating them into normal speech do we learn what he has said and why. His speech Monday to the United Nations General Assembly made seven overlapping and interdependent points that are worth translating.

Unlike Barack Obama’s passionate address, Putin delivered his remarks in the measured and moderate tones of a world statesman. They were still words of warning: Join us in a broad coalition and leave nondemocratic regimes alone, or catastrophe will strike.

Following are the major points that Putin wished his audience to take back to their respective countries:

First, the United States and its Western allies are responsible for the sad state of world affairs owing to their foolhardy interventions on behalf of democratic revolutions. Democratic revolutions are the dreams of those who have unrealistic views of the world. The USSR learned that it could not export socialist revolution; the West must learn that it cannot export democratic revolution.

Second, the United Nations, not some agglomeration of prosperous Western powers, should guarantee peace and security for all, not just to a select few singled out for narrow benefit. Only the U.N. can form a broad coalition that can put an end to the terrorist threats of ISIL. The matter is urgent. If such a coalition is not formed soon, the migrant flow to Europe will reach into the millions, not tens of thousands, and no country will be safe from terrorist attack, says Putin.

Three, Russia’s status as a veto-welding member of the U.N. Security Council is not affected by Russia’s recent disagreements — namely, the United Nations’ condemnation of the Crimean annexation and Russia’s veto of a criminal tribunal to punish those responsible for shooting down Malaysia Airlines MH17. Such disagreements, even among the major Western powers, have disrupted the work of the Security Council since the U.N.’s founding. Putin tells his audience that the fact that Russia disagrees with certain U.N. resolutions is normal and does not affect its veto power.

Fourth, the West must understand that the choice between governmentalism (‘gosudarstvennost’) and chaos must be made in favor of the former. The Assad government may not be ideal, but it is the only institution of statehood that exists. Libya’s Gaddafi regime was tyrannical, but what came afterward has been worse. Well-intentioned actions that destroy a nation’s “governmentalism” leave vacuums that forces of evil, such as ISIL, fill. The ranks of ISIL, for example, were populated with the disaffected remnants of Saddam Hussein’s regime. No such thing as a moderate opposition exists, as shown by America’s comedic efforts to train and arm anti-Assad forces.

Fifth, the West must suppress its appetite for supporting democratic opposition forces that challenge “governmentalism” in regimes whose human rights, press freedom, and election procedures fall short of Western ideals. (Not stated by Putin is that he includes Russia in this category; hands off Russia’s internal affairs.) The West’s meddling in Ukraine had the unanticipated consequence of what Putin calls a “spontaneous civil war,” with over 8,000 deaths.

Sixth, the world must return to normal trading patterns, “harmonized” by the World Trade Organization and the U.N. This new order cannot be a diktat of the strong but must be fair and even for all, perhaps including a common market between the European Union and Putin’s proposed Eurasian Union. Sanctions, which are imposed for political reasons and personal financial gains, would have no room in such a world order. The sanctions against Russia must be lifted immediately. The West knows they are not fulfilling the purposes for which they were levied.

Seventh, the Western world must respect the security concerns of Russia over NATO expansion. After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact, NATO enlargement can only be seen as encircling and threatening Russia’s sovereignty. If the world goes to a common market of common markets (European Union with Putin’s Eurasian Union), there is no reason to be concerned about the EU expanding to include Ukraine.

* * *

Putin’s U.N. speech did not deviate from previews he gave weeks earlier. His broad coalition will include the Assad government as a non-negotiable condition. Putin portrays himself as the knight on a white horse galloping in to save the day for the bumbling Obama. Putin is betting his new world order on the U.N., where less than half of its members are classified as free and where his “leave bad regimes alone” message resonates.

Putin cleverly weaves together points to which Western audiences would agree (we have indeed made a mess of the Middle East and Ukraine) with ideas that are wrong or inoperable. He does not explain how a broad coalition can be formed that includes warring Sunni and Shia factions. Nor does he tell us how his Eurasian Union can blend with the European Union, when both are founded on completely different economic and political principles. Are the Western countries supposed to lift sanctions if Putin’s armed forces fight only against anti-Assad forces? Is the West supposed to tolerate ruling regimes, no matter how terrible, just because they can promise a state that prevents vacuums from being formed?”

Putin was the center of attention in New York. This is what drives him. Instead of Putin the ostracized, he is now Putin the creator of a new world order.

Paul R. Gregory is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution. He holds an endowed professorship in the Department of Economics at the University of Houston, Texas, is a research professor at the German Institute for Economic Research in Berlin, and is emeritus chair of the International Advisory Board of the Kiev School of Economics.

Authors:

Related stories on these topics:

Louie

I wish Putin would call out the neo-cons for the illegal overthrow of the Ukraine government. Obama is too much of a wuss to stand up to them, so yet again, they make the U.S. the villain of the world.

Posted on 9/29/15 | 11:24 AM CEST

Milan

Long live Vladimir Vladimirovič Putin!

Posted on 9/29/15 | 11:55 AM CEST

Art Carnage

One can despise Putin yet admire his capability over the JV team in the White House.

Posted on 9/29/15 | 11:56 AM CEST

joseph garrett winters

We must pray for our God Yahweh to deal with our lieing president. And other world leaders.and for the christains to keep their faith in Jesus Christ thanking our God To protect Israel his chosen people. And for our God Yahweh to punnish the evil out in this world.amen. I know he lives in me.what about you?

Posted on 9/29/15 | 12:08 PM CEST

Jack

Here’s what happened at the UN council meeting. Putin picked his teeth with his fingers then poked Obama’s left eye with one of his fingers. Obama pretended nothing happened and everyone looked down at their shoes. So now Obama gave his speech. His left eye was pink and weepy; it blinked like mad. Everybody grimaced at the pink eye but nobody said a word about it. And nobody hears a thing Obama said. That was what happened.

Posted on 9/29/15 | 12:17 PM CEST

Joe Blow

obummer has made a mess of everything he has done. We can’t get rid of him soon enough!! He needs to go now and take his crappy administration with him!!

Posted on 9/29/15 | 12:18 PM CEST

Marcia Coulter

Thought you might be interested in this.

Posted on 9/29/15 | 12:35 PM CEST

Facts

These comments just make me sad. We’ve got a few people who are just heaping praise on Putin, acting like a fascist soldier from a long forgot age. Then there’s the guy who’s talking about God and trying to convert people to Christianity. Then there are the weird conservatives who think the whole world hates us because… black people? I don’t actually know why they think that.

I guess the comment section on Politico is not the place to look for intelligence.

Posted on 9/29/15 | 12:42 PM CEST

Tonydfixer

Putin is one of the leaders in it for his own gain, does he think the rest of the world is stupid ? only Putin would think that having ruling governments that kill large swaths of its own citizens because they are not in agreement is OK. As he thinks that there should not be any reprisals for shooting an airliner full of innocent people.Putin’s mind is not right.

Posted on 9/29/15 | 12:44 PM CEST

Joseph Heeke

This is probably the most important speech of our times and possibly all of history. Putin is very smart, pragmatic and believable. He has also accurately viewed and stated the world geopolitical situation.
Unfortunately, he is also pointing the direction of Biblical prophecy which does not make him evil or wrong, but the time of trouble spoken of in the Revelation, is a dangerous time. He is also speaking truthfully which is a credit to his moral standing. Compared to Obama, who utters lies continuously, he has positioned himself to be listened to and followed to a large degree.
Thanks Obama, you have succeeded in creating a new world order by your lies and foolishness, which we now have little control over. Go back to Kenya.

joe

Both Putin and the West are full of s… Whatever they say, both have only their narrow geopolitical interests in mind.

The West is wrong because its support for democracy is HIGHLY selective. Why do the Ukrainians and Syrians deserve democracy but Saudis and Uzbekistanis don’t?

Putin is wrong to support tyrants on the grounds that “some stability is better than none.” By that logic, we’d all still be living in feudalism under absolute monarchies.

Meanwhile, the U.N. is an unfunny joke. As the article states, more than a half of its members are autocracies to some degree. A system whose constituent components do not share the same fundamental standards and values can NOT *possibly* be functional. It’s true of domestic systems; it’s true of international ones, too. The best that can be said about the U.N. is that it’s probably better than nothing.

Posted on 9/29/15 | 12:57 PM CEST

iam he

excellent article…..

Posted on 9/29/15 | 1:05 PM CEST

Houston, Texas

To Paul R. Gregory: Is the West supposed to tolerate ruling regimes, no matter how terrible, just because they can promise a state that prevents vacuums from being formed?” The answer is a resounding YES!!!!!! It seems you don’t see the past the window of tremendous human suffering that your question of policy so flippantly posed entails. It is exactly this type of hubris from which this terrible question emanates that makes America the belligerent the scourge of the world.

Posted on 9/29/15 | 1:05 PM CEST

iam he

Obama is not a GOP neocon sociopath… He is a man with a fully functional social conscience and a corresponding sense of social responsibility…. he is not a liar… If a bad regime is committing murderous crimes against its own people -any people-… time to move in, wipe it off the face of the map -the government- and chance a better governance taking over… that is where I cast my vote… Governments and their “dignitaries” must be held criminally responsible …unto the death penalty… even when and where the death penalty is banned everywhere else on earth.

Posted on 9/29/15 | 1:15 PM CEST

John

Lets face it folks, none of us know the backend negotiations going on between the powers that be. But at the very least, I can see collaboration between those against ISIS. The Russians have just as much to loose from massive refugee immigration into Europe. They also have satellite nations with large Islamic constituents. Unpredictable disorder is bad for any nation-state. I would prefer the Syria before ISIS even with Assad in power. If Yemen is lost then Saudi is at risk, then Egypt, then Jordan.

Posted on 9/29/15 | 2:04 PM CEST

DILIP KUMAR

I am agree with two points…
one
it is high time that this world should not be guided by the US alone …
two
biggest threat of this world is terrorism…islamic terrorism.

Posted on 9/29/15 | 3:21 PM CEST

Ironwoker

1. Agree
2. Agree
3. Not interested
4. Agree
5. Agree
6. Disagree. Russia must pay the price for annexation of Crimea. Dearly.
7. Disagree. CCCP collapsed two decades ago, it’s up to newly formed countries to chose sides or not. In theory it shouldn’t be any “spheres of influence”, however Russia must accept the newly developed geopolitical reality.

veth

The man who downed MH17, invaded Donbass and C rimea an dmany other warcrimes………….

Posted on 9/29/15 | 9:42 PM CEST

Giorgio

We did not make a mess of Ukraine. The pro-democracy opposition was strong before Yanukovych and during. The government fell largely because of the popular movement against it. The West’s role was minor. Most importantly, Ukraine is not a mess and if not for Putin’s aggression against it, it would be more like Bulgaria or Romania.

To Louie: neo-cons did not overthrow Ukrainian government – let’s not repeat Putin’s absurdities. To Milan: yes, let him live long so he can go to prison for a long time.